800°

Xbox LIVE Service Alert Issued

A new year begins, and we have encountered our first issue with an online gaming service: Xbox LIVE has entered a ‘service alert’ status.

Read Full Story >>
electronictheatre.co.uk
lorianguy4502d ago

Judging by MS's track record, it'll be sorted soon.

xtremexx4502d ago

woah, you told the future, its been fixed lol

lorianguy4502d ago (Edited 4502d ago )

Well I guess that confirms it - I'm Jesus!

...or just lucky...

jimbobwahey4502d ago

If only he'd been around to say this back when Xbox Live went down for 3 whole weeks. Fun times!

evilunklebud4502d ago

Maybe you forgot to pay your internet bill then....?

I've had it since 05.... occasional outages lasting hours has been my max annoyance.

jimbobwahey4502d ago

Xbox Live went down for weeks after the original Modern Warfare was launched. All Microsoft did to make up for the downtime of their paid service was give everybody a copy of that crappy submarine XBLA game months afterwards as a weak apology.

I remember since it was the reason I sold my copy of the game for 360 and picked it up for PS3 instead, actually got to play the game then!

Echo3074502d ago (Edited 4502d ago )

@Jimbob

Fanboy alert!

XBL didn't actually "go down" for 3-4 weeks like some are claiming. I remember that rough patch vividly because I had just got my 360.

Launching private chat, sending messages, and inviting/joining other players was very rough and mostly unusable, but only a couple of times during that almost month-long period just after X-mas did XBL actually refuse to sign me in and let my play online by myself.

People like to compare that situation to that of the PSN downtime but they're not quite the same thing and obviously had different causes (overload from too many people playing vs. insecure network).

EDIT - And the "crappy submarine XBLA game months afterwards as a weak apology" was a game called Undertow that scored 76 on Metacritic and was worth $10. Even if the network had been down for an entire month, the game was worth way more than one month of service. Also, it wasn't months later that they offered this. Service was restored to normal in mid-January, and Microsoft announced this offer on 1/22. Also important to note that the free game was also given to Silver members who weren't currently paying for Gold.

evilunklebud4502d ago

@jimbobwahey

Hmmmm, I did not experience weeks of downtime as you did.

Your last sentence reeks of fanboy-ism as well.

orange-skittle4502d ago

Damn, can anyone say PWNED! talk about taking it to him with facts and shutting him up. PSN users love to compare their crappy service w/ XBL. I own both and I have to tell you, the XBL Netflix app is far superior to the PSN version. The interface is better and I love when the ending credits start to roll it goes to picture in picture and gives you a choice of 3 movies to look at next and asked how you like it to rate it for the next guy. It had me watching movies all day finding movies I didnt know were in the library. PSN doesnt do any of that. You get what you pay for

Kurt Russell4502d ago

Undertow was wicked. And live didn't go down for 3 weeks, was just a bit buggy with some of its features that year.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4502d ago
Euthanasia784502d ago (Edited 4502d ago )

Ya, that $1.15 a week for Live is worth it. I could never understand why ppl complained about the price. It's a solid service and well worth it. I'm not gonna go there with Sony, but I own one. I know what happened. Idk. I have no preference. I have many ps games. I'm just saying. MS security is good. (for xbox) LOL

christopher64534502d ago

WOW you pay $1.15/week? I only pay $.96/week...

kaveti66164502d ago

I know what you mean, but think of it this way. Verizon was about to issue a new "convenience fee" of $2.00 for every time someone pays their phone bill using their smartphone's data plan.

Some people would say, "Not a big deal, that's only 2 more dollars a month." It's the same argument you use to justify the XBL fee.

2 dollars a month more doesn't seem like much, but when everyone who pays their bill that way is charged, Verizon stands to make hundreds of millions more in pure profit.

And Microsoft charges XBL Gold users a fee that doesn't seem like much when you break down the cost, but they are basically nickel and diming their customers.

It doesn't hurt the individual that much, but it takes about a billion dollars away from total XBL users annually.

We allow corporations to nickel and dime us all the time because we aren't suffering too much individually from it. It's a smart tactic. When gas prices go up 20 cents a gallon we complain a bit but then we say, "Aw, that's okay. I can afford it." And the oil companies get very wealthy, and their executives are giving themselves 200 million dollar bonuses. And they look for any reason (natural disaster, social revolution in Middle East, etc) to raise gas prices, even though their oil production is often unaffected by these events. And we let them, because America is all about screwing people over to achieve the American Dream.

kreate4502d ago

@kaveti

ur right.
But i dont think it matters. Xbox live users are very happy paying for gold. When the price went up from 49.99 to 59.99 nobody complained except ppl with brains who are not a fanboy. Which there isnt many of them.

Even if the price further increases. 10, 20, 30 dollar increase. The same reason ppl use to justify their spending will be used again.

Cuz when u break the price down to month to month. Week by week. Day by day. Its only so many cents per hour per person.

And ppl will use the psn hack as another means to justify their payments even though psn hack has not much to do with paying for xbox gold cuz that is what they love to begin with.

Ravenor4502d ago

Kaveti that is such broken logic, paying to use your cellphones data to pay a bill is stupid because you've already paid for that bandwidth. Microsoft merely charges you to use their network, something they have every right to do and if you don't want to pay it go right ahead and don't.

da_2pacalypse4502d ago

I get my service for 39.99 a year... so that's like 75 cents

gamingdroid4502d ago (Edited 4502d ago )

@kaveti6616

Because the provider stands to make huge profits doesn't change the value proposition they provide you.

For instance, did you know make-up has a 90% profit margin? Did you know bottled water has more than a 99.99% profit margin?

If you don't like it, don't buy it!

... It's not like there isn't an alternative!?

***We allow corporations to nickel and dime us all the time because we aren't suffering too much individually from it. It's a smart tactic. When gas prices go up 20 cents a gallon we complain a bit but then we say, "Aw, that's okay. I can afford it."***

That is because consumers view the 20 cent increase in price negligible to the benefit they reap from the product.

***And the oil companies get very wealthy, and their executives are giving themselves 200 million dollar bonuses.***

What executives do with their "earnings" is their business, not yours!

***And they look for any reason (natural disaster, social revolution in Middle East, etc) to raise gas prices, even though their oil production is often unaffected by these events. And we let them, because America is all about screwing people over to achieve the American Dream.***

That said, it's not American Corporations that own oil or it's production... it's the Middle East and they got essentially a monopoly thanks to OPEC. It's not a free market! You should do some research!

I would also like to add that the American Dream is what has driven innovation in technology and produced by far the vast majority of the largest corporations that produces some of the most used products/services to the entire world.

kreate4502d ago (Edited 4502d ago )

@gamingdroid

'That is because consumers view the 20 cent increase in price negligible to the benefit they reap from the product.'

Actually i think its more like consumers dont have a choice but to buy it.

U cant really tell a person
'if u dont like it, dont buy it'
In situations like these

what u want us to do? Walk everywhere?

We live in a greedy capitalistic society. Sure ... If we dont like it, i guess we'll not buy it.......

hopefully ur right.

some points u made in previous articles i was agreeing with u especially the one where u were attacking the corporations and defending the gamers with the 'online pass' controversy.

What happened to all the logics u set forth in those comments?

kaveti66164502d ago

"It's not like there isn't an alternative!?"

You don't know what you're talking about.
No matter what service carrier you choose, you're facing long-term contracts, fees, automatic surcharges for features you don't use, automatic activation of features (long distance to Canada).

"What executives do with their "earnings" is their business, not yours!"

I don't know what backwards country you hail from, but when a corporation raises prices on me without proper justification just so the head honchos can buy another island, it's my business.

The most important resources in the world should not be controlled by publicly traded corporations. They have no vested interest in the community. They care about lining their pockets by lining the pockets of their worthless day-trader investors.

s45gr324502d ago

It is a cohesive service and has better community features i.e. party system, the zones you know that ones that let you play with either pro gamers or celebrities. Excellent matchmaking system. Is just that the $60.00 don't cover the online passes, the netflix, hulu plus, and sky tv monthly fees. No twitter, facebook support, no loyalty program, peer to peer servers, pay five dollars for avatar props and two dollars for avatar clothing that is if you are into avatars. STEAM does it all for free no avatars though.

gamingdroid4502d ago

@kreate

***Actually i think its more like consumers dont have a choice but to buy it.***

So you have no choice in living closer, walking, biking, use electric cars, or take public transportation?

***What happened to all the logics u set forth in those comments?***

I'm pro capitalism as well as consumer protection. I was primarily responding to kaveti6616 whom seem to say that lost of money is taken from consumers without any value provided back, which is simply not true. Furthermore he goes on to bash America Dream whom is the pillar in motivating people in providing innovation.

In regards to Online Passes, I do not agree with them because they charge you for something that was once part of the game without providing any extra value what so ever (some dedicated servers would be nice). Furthermore, it also hurts the online community so it is all around a loss for everyone.

@kaveti6616

***No matter what service carrier you choose, you're facing long-term contracts, fees, automatic surcharges for features you don't use, automatic activation of features (long distance to Canada).***

My comment was more directed towards Xbox Live, but technically you do agree to all those terms when you sign up for the telecom's offering. Unfortunately, the telecoms have far too much government protection and regulation so there isn't proper competition in the market to drive prices down.

***I don't know what backwards country you hail from, but when a corporation raises prices on me without proper justification just so the head honchos can buy another island, it's my business.***

Prices are pretty much dictated by demand so CEO getting millions in earnings isn't a reflection of the price they are charging you for the service/product. It tends to indicate demand unless there aren't enough competition or there really isn't free competition.

CEO compensation is a fraction of earnings, and often times even a company experiencing losses will pay millions.

My main issue is more with people getting upset with others making millions, when they are free to do the same and donate their earnings or wahtever they prefer. I want freedom to earn.

***The most important resources in the world should not be controlled by publicly traded corporations. They have no vested interest in the community. They care about lining their pockets by lining the pockets of their worthless day-trader investors.***

Unfortunately, basically almost any resource you can name is controlled by companies (public or not). I do agree that it is unfortunate that resources that are essential shouldn't be controlled, but the alternative is government control. We all know, they aren't efficient.

My comment was more directed towards Xbox Live (and to a minor extent Verizion). Neither is required, and there are alternatives such as landlines (even cheap ones for low income in some places) and free online gaming services on different platforms. That said, Xbox Live actually offers something the competition doesn't for a cost. If you are unhappy with that choose a different provider that exist.

That said, none of the oil issues has anything to do with American Dream and is a completely different discussion. It has everything to do with the Middle East and OPEC. In fact, the US is among the cheapest (if not the cheapest) oil prices for consumers!

LettingGo4502d ago

NO! It has nothing to do with security! The same thing could have happened to Live! The PSN was the one that got attacked first though. Live was just as week before the attacks. Most Microsoft and Sony improved security after the attacks.

kaveti66164502d ago

Please don't use the term "earn" incorrectly.

If BP or Exxon Mobil raises the price of gasoline in response to a natural disaster that did not affect their production at all, then they're not earning money. They're manipulating cost under the guise of crisis in order to squeeze the market.

When service providers charge you an additional cost to allow texting, they are not earning money. Do you know how texts are sent. They travel on the same packets of data that are regularly sent between the mobile phone and the cell tower to maintain a connection. That means the service provider isn't doing any more work to provide you with the texting feature. They actually do more work to restrict the consumer from texting. That is not an honest way to make a living. It's like if someone sold you a car with three wheels and then charged you an additional fee for the fourth wheel.

The American Dream is no different from the African Dream or the Russian Dream or the Asian Dream or whatever other ethnicity/race exists on this planet's dream. Everyone in the world wants to live comfortably with some sense of financial security.

I wasn't criticizing the American Dream. I was criticizing the perverted misinterpretation of it by people who find themselves in a position to exploit the masses for unreasonably lavish ends. At the expense of everyone else, these people live like kings, and when we point out that they got there through deception and manipulation, they cry for freedom, they accuse us of being unpatriotic.

As George Carlin once said, the reason why they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it.

xAlmostPro4502d ago

Well it's not that price a week at all is it?.. There's no option to pay in that method, you must pay in one lump sum.

gamingdroid4502d ago (Edited 4502d ago )

@kaveti6616

***If BP or Exxon Mobil raises the price of gasoline in response to a natural disaster that did not affect their production at all, then they're not earning money. They're manipulating cost under the guise of crisis in order to squeeze the market.***

There is nothing preventing them from raising costs regardless, because you choose to be dependent on it.

... and yes they did earn it. These companies still have to pump this oil from the ground up, transport it to you and sell it.

***When service providers charge you an additional cost to allow texting, they are not earning money. Do you know how texts are sent. They travel on the same packets of data that are regularly sent between the mobile phone and the cell tower to maintain a connection. That means the service provider isn't doing any more work to provide you with the texting feature. They actually do more work to restrict the consumer from texting. That is not an honest way to make a living.***

But you don't have to use texting! What a concept!

Furthermore, what "companies" do with their network is none of your concern. All you need to know is you are paying a price for something they provide. If you see value, you buy. It's not a very hard concept to understand.

***It's like if someone sold you a car with three wheels and then charged you an additional fee for the fourth wheel.***

How about not buying the three wheeled car? It's not like you didn't know you bought a three wheeled car and then complained about it later?

Sounds like a person, that puts themselves in misery and blames everyone else for it.

***The American Dream is no different from the African Dream or the Russian Dream or the Asian Dream or whatever other ethnicity/race exists on this planet's dream. Everyone in the world wants to live comfortably with some sense of financial security.***

That is actually incorrect. As a European that now lives in the US, there is significance difference in peoples motivation by first hand experience due to the American Dream and "the land of opportunities" (that unfortunately is rapidly turning into the land of welfare opportunities).

***I wasn't criticizing the American Dream. I was criticizing the perverted misinterpretation of it by people who find themselves in a position to exploit the masses for unreasonably lavish ends.***

Nobody wants to be exploited, but what you have shown so far is self subjected exploitation i.e. you allowed yourself to be exploited. We aren't talking about life essential things here.

***At the expense of everyone else, these people live like kings, and when we point out that they got there through deception and manipulation, they cry for freedom, they accuse us of being unpatriotic.***

Again, how they live with the money they earn is none of your concern. You are free to "earn the same" and fight them while living an unlavish lifestyle....

orange-skittle4502d ago

I never really complained considering what I saw coming. They raised it because those new apps arent free. MS has to pay for them so they have to raise the rate. Look at PSN, all the good features are for PLUS subscribers now. You pay $50 a year and they still dont have half the features or arcade games XBL has. I play my PS3 everyday, but PSN is trash. I wouldn't mind paying $50 a year on PSN if they included everything LIVE gives.

Euthanasia784502d ago

I always get my yr subscription for 39.99, and I have zero problem with paying. I like Live. I'm a gamer, and I don't mind paying for my hobby. Wait till every single game has a pass and subscription. Gaming is only going to get more expensive as technology gets better and better. We have no choice in the matter. We don't have to buy Live, but the Xbox sux without it. It's just the way it is.

insomnium24502d ago

"There is nothing preventing them from raising costs regardless, because you choose to be dependent on it."

I have no other choise whatsoever but to buy gasoline and drive my car to work every day. Not everyone lives in a city you do know that right?

No matter what they charge I have to pay. All I can do is drive as little as possible and plan ahead with my trips to stores and stuff.

"... and yes they did earn it. These companies still have to pump this oil from the ground up, transport it to you and sell it. "

They would've pumped the same amount anyway they just chose to charge more for the same amount this time around. You seem to not understand on purpose. That's not earning. That's BS and everyone knows it.

"Nobody wants to be exploited, but what you have shown so far is self subjected exploitation i.e. you allowed yourself to be exploited."

If I don't buy gas I can't go to work. If I don't pay for live I can't play online.

You yourself said "In regards to Online Passes, I do not agree with them because they charge you for something that was once part of the game without providing any extra value what so ever (some dedicated servers would be nice)." So tell me what extra value does live fees bring to people who only care about PLAYING online?

gamingdroid4502d ago (Edited 4502d ago )

@insomnium2

***I have no other choise whatsoever but to buy gasoline and drive my car to work every day. Not everyone lives in a city you do know that right?***

How about you move into the city? Get a different job?

Because you are used to it, doesn't mean that you have to use it. I can agree with it not being practical for everyone, but there is little you can do other than lobby your government (I'm assuming you are in the US) for them to open up oil drilling off the coast. That will increase supply and potentially lower prices.

That said, the reason why oil prices is high is due to a small group of people controlling a large portion of the world's oil supply while banding togheter.

***They would've pumped the same amount anyway they just chose to charge more for the same amount this time around. You seem to not understand on purpose. That's not earning. That's BS and everyone knows it.***

What people seem to miss is that "profits" is dependent on market demand, not on the actual cost. Why do you think gold is expensive?

***If I don't buy gas I can't go to work.***

OK... how about live closer to work or get another job?

***If I don't pay for live I can't play online.***

No, but you can buy another console or even a PC that gives you free online play. Why buy an Xbox 360 that clearly tells you there is a fee then complain about it later?

Only idiots do that. Are you one of them?

***So tell me what extra value does live fees bring to people who only care about PLAYING online?***

MS has brought numerous "exclusive" features to online play including party system, beacons and a dedicated team to handle online cheaters and illegal activity.

They have also brought you the fastest online gaming network. Ever wondered why your achievements are almost instantly synched while your trophy sync takes forever (unless you pay for PSN+ and get a batch job run daily at night).

On top of that you have received numerous dashboard updates that improve the user interface for gaming functionality as well.

That said, I bet you the vast majority just don't "only play games online".

I'm very much against Online Passes as it stands, because nothing is offered in addition and it is purely a value subtraction to the consumer. Even big games sometimes suffer from a small online community, and Online Passes will ensure it will stay even smaller.

+ Show (16) more repliesLast reply 4502d ago
jaymart2k4502d ago

Topic title misleading. It's only a App problem. Nothing to do with the online service whatsoever.

Euthanasia784502d ago

Don't you love how they "trump" it up to sound worse than it was?

BatRastered4502d ago

This is sadly par for the course at N4G these days. I can't believe people approve crap like that.

radphil4502d ago

"Both Sky Player and LoveFilm apps are encountering difficulties throughout Europe and NA"

For those that want to know the issue.

marison4502d ago

No shit!

It's the beginning of the end. At least a month of downtime, all ours Gamerpoints and MS Points gone and $10.000 credit card bills!

RaidensRising4502d ago

Just played skyplayer no problems in the UK.

Bereaver4502d ago Show
Euthanasia784502d ago

I had a little bit of a difficult time with UFC 141, but I got it. It buffered a bit, but not that much. Maybe 3 times for a min each. Not that bad. I wouldn't pay for one yet tho. It's gotta get more stable first.

Show all comments (67)
160°

OG Xbox Live Replacement 'Insignia' Continues To Grow With 11 New Supported Games

Online multiplayer is back for 11 more games thanks to Insignia's XBL 1.0 replacement service running on Original Xbox consoles and the Xemu emulator on PC. Multiplayer, voice chat, leaderboards, etc. have been a monthly addition for many games from Xbox's past library thank to the team at Insignia.live! The 11 new games are now playable online once again after 13+ years.

Read Full Story >>
purexbox.com
XiNatsuDragnel413d ago

Yes yes now bring x360 xbox live then we're golden for life.

Asplundh411d ago

?? Xbox 360 servers are still online, they haven't been taken down yet.

XiNatsuDragnel411d ago

Nah they will be tho look at rscs3 they have psn made in there emulator why not xenia bro?

Blashted411d ago

Service still in beta form, sign up/player counts here: https://insignia.live/

slayereddy411d ago (Edited 411d ago )

Booo!! I was hoping that was Rainbow Six: Black Arrow...Boo!! again. I thought this coming to Xbox. I don't even read it I was so excited.

210°

Minecraft on Nintendo Switch gets Xbox Live Achievements and Gamerscore

One of the most popular versions of the title is available on Nintendo Switch and it just got even better. The Bedrock version of Minecraft just released for Nintendo Switch, both digitally on the Nintendo eShop and as a physical release.

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
Aceman182139d ago

And here's why Sony not doing it yet lol.

rainslacker2139d ago

People are disagreeing with you, but you have a point. Why would Sony want people to get any kind of investment through a competing ecosystem.

I don't think it's their biggest reason for not doing cross play, but obviously, they probably wouldn't be too keen on such a thing.

gamer78042139d ago

Other games devs that want crossplay wouldn't have achievements. Th. Answer has already been revealed as a monetary decision

Eonjay2139d ago

@gamer
Yes its always about mon edy, for both. Nothing else.

Sharky2312138d ago

I think at first everybody was in agreement and then MS dropped a money figure. Sony probably felt that it was unreasonable because they have the bigger install base. Nintendo needed this to happen so they jumped right in. That’s just my opinion I could be wrong!

rainslacker2138d ago

@gamer

True, but at the same time, allowing cross play opens up these kinds of doors. If the two companies talked about it as some point, then they both had their own needs for it to go forward. I doubt either of them just outright denied the other to be a dick about it. But I can easily see that the things one company asked for not being acceptable to the other, and as it stands, we don't know what was asked for, by who, or who couldn't agree with such demands. For all we know, Sony had some demand that MS couldn't accept.

But Eonjay is right. Money will have a lot to do with it....although I doubt any exchange of money would need to take place. But on the back end, Sony, or even MS, may have felt the potential loss to their own brand didn't outweigh the benefits to their consumer.

@Sharky

I couldn't say with Nintendo. I have this feeling they don't really know where they want to go with their online. I don't see cross play with Switch really benefiting or hurting their system, because I don't really think Nintendo's main focus is online gaming to such a high degree to begin with. Nintendo is just starting up their online service, and I feel it's going to go through some growing pains. I hope that what they're doing works out for them, and if anything, maybe between them and MS, they'll show that cross play isn't going to be an issue no matter how it plays out.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2138d ago
2139d ago Replies(2)
porkChop2139d ago

This is the only game that does this. And that's because it's published by Microsoft and uses Xbox Live as its online platform. None of the other cross play games do this.

2139d ago
Vrabstin2139d ago

The overwhelming disagrees to people providing remarks that are more than just opinion but are actually true is just sad. I'm sorry I mean pathetic. It would not be a good idea for Sony to do this same thing.

SuperSonic912139d ago

Blunder Twins power activate!
Phil and Reggie!
Ew!

2139d ago
G3ng4r2138d ago

Nintendo doesn't mind the online help I'm sure. Also sure ps4 base would keep their trophy system.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2138d ago
badz1492139d ago

Wow...nice job MS. Invading the Switch now, are we?

Prince_TFK2139d ago

It’s call cooperation? Not that Sony knows anything about it though.

King_Lothric2139d ago

It is called the weakest systems trying to survive. Not that Sony knows anything about it.

Prince_TFK2139d ago

Are you saying that the Switch and the X1 are dying?

Eonjay2139d ago

Sony is under no obligation to host the competitors ecosystem on it's own paid service. At all. They don't owe you anything. You are not entitled to PSN.

mcstorm2139d ago

King_Lothric do you remember a console called the PlayStation Vita? Oooo I guess that's not counted because it sold poor and had no support at all from Sony?

Come on Sony have messed up a few times some times it hurts them others it dose not. VR was the next big thing and we are still waiting with less and less games adapting vr.
Move ps eye also devices that have slid back into the shadows. All 3 have made mistakes this gen and all 3 are trying to put them right.
Cross play though is one Sony need to out right. Why should everyone not be able to play each other no matter the console if you own the same game for me this is kind of where Sony have a 1up and one down on Microsoft as if they open it up to work with everyone else they have the exclusives locked up at the moment so more reason for people to cross play on a PS4 over the other two but psn is still not as good as live and online play is better on the xbox. That makes it an interesting battle as for the switch well Nintendo have a lot of catching up to do online side but Nintendo gamers do like Nintendo games and if games like fortnight, Minecraft and more are cross play on it the better for Nintendo.

For me ide just love to be able to play my ps or switch friends from my Xbox or when our and about from my switch and pickup from where I left off to. Times have moved on it should not be a closed system anymore for gaming no matter th IP or console.

Dragonscale2139d ago

@kun, its called common sense fgs. The last thing sony needs is any form of 'cooperation' with ms and xbox.

Prince_TFK2138d ago (Edited 2138d ago )

@dragonscale

Yeah and Sony can keep being all high and mighty as much as they want. Pretty soon they will be the odd man out and the only one who can’t play nice with others.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2138d ago
2139d ago
aconnellan2139d ago

“Invading the switch now, are we?”

Yeah, I’m sure this was a shady move that Nintendo had no hand in, or knowledge of, before it actually happened. It’s really a clever ruse so MS can have more people getting achievements. Curse them! Next thing you know, Switch players will be forced to by an Xbox in order to verify Minecraft on their Switch! Diabolical!

/s

letsa_go2139d ago

I guarantee Microsoft will add these numbers into their xbox live engagement statistics! 100 million creepers exploded through xbox live on switch and xbox one!

badz1492139d ago

Stay tune for NPD reports next month

Cheesetoenails2138d ago (Edited 2138d ago )

invading..hahahahahahaha enjoy your CLOSED ecosystem then. Cooperation is now a bad thing?

its so amazing that when they "accidentally" allowed cross play on another game there was no outrage from Sony fans.

rainslacker2138d ago (Edited 2138d ago )

Hate to break it to you, but XBL is a closed ecosystem. MS wants nothing more than to make their ecosystem as closed as possible. This achievement thing just brings them more users, which is what they want. It works out for the gamer, but it's not like they're doing it because they're amazingly altruistic.

Personally, I'd rather that Nintendo just make their own achievement system. That's something they are way behind on, and there is no reason not to have it. I'd imagine more people would care about that than they'd care about playing minecraft with Xbox players. But to date, we haven't seen a lot of Switch players caring about achievements either....so take that for what it's worth.

thexmanone2138d ago

They own Minecraft, why not

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2138d ago
Ninte2139d ago

Wow! First the minecraft play together video, then twitter and now this. What's next?

Kabaneri2139d ago (Edited 2139d ago )

Drake plays crossplay Minecraft with Ninja on Switch.

King_Lothric2139d ago

I don't want any intrusive Xbox stuff on my Playstation ecosystem. I understand that when you are surviving in the market you need to do things you may not like to survive. Sony is not on this position so it doesn't need to help the competition to survive.

porkChop2139d ago

Achievements and gamerscore are no more intrusive than trophies and levels on PS. It's the same system, just with different branding. Not liking the idea of having Xbox stuff is fine, I do personally think it's a little weird, but I wouldn't say it's intrusive.

Kingthrash3602139d ago

It exposes your userbase to the competition. It shows what the true plan is

Dragonscale2139d ago

No thanks pork. Don't want anything xbox related on my PlayStation account fgs.

aconnellan2139d ago

@Kingthrash

*achievement pops on PlayStation version of Minecraft, notifies Microsoft headquarters*

“Mr Spencer, we did it! We finally got achievements to come up on PS games!”

“Great work! Now remind me again... what does this actually get us?”

“... I’ll have to double check our ‘clever ruse’ manual and get back to you, because I really don’t know”

Tell me. What is their ‘true plan’?

porkChop2138d ago

@Dragonscale

Did you read all of my comment? I agree it's weird, I don't want it either. I just don't think it's "intrusive". It works the same way as PS trophies do.

rainslacker2138d ago

@aconnellan

What does it get MS? It gets them direct access to Nintendo's user base. They now have a email address of a Nintendo user. MS can, and likely will, send out marketing directly to those people, circumventing every compliance standard in place in how 3rd party publishers are allowed to contact said systems user base. I'm almost positive this is why Sony wouldn't allow it on PSN, despite not disallowing 3rd party accounts.

On top of that, it gets them yet another MAU. Something that's very important to MS, because that's what they're using to report to investors on their future potential, and current standings. That means that the bigger the numbers go, the more their stocks are worth. Hence, more money to work with.

Beyond that, it gets people invested in their ecosystem in some way. That's good for MS, not so good for Nintendo if people decide to move over to Xbox for some reason.

This whole thing seems like it's much more beneficial for MS than it is Nintendo. I'm not really sure what Nintendo is getting out of it, and seems like a lot to risk just to have one game with cross play to have some good PR and a way to promote their own online service.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2138d ago
DwightSchrute012139d ago (Edited 2139d ago )

The competition are surviving just fine. Every sony fan acts like they got 80 million users over night. It's taken years for them to get to that number and if switch came out decades ago at the same time it would have the same user base or more by now. Sony fanboys like to selectively forget this fact though

XabiDaChosenOne2139d ago

It took Sony a little more than four years to get to this point not "decades" and the WiiU released an entire year before the PS4 and it isat 1/8th of the sales what's your excuse for that?

DwightSchrute012139d ago

@XsbiDaChosenOne Wii U an d the switch are 2 different consoles. Any idiot can see that. Was the Wii U marketed as well as the switch Is? Could you play the Wii U on the go? Did the Wii U have as much 3rd party support as the switch. No.

Another selective with information sony fanboy.

DialgaMarine2138d ago (Edited 2138d ago )

Wii U had better third party support than Switch. Wii U had CoD, AC, ME, Aliens, Darksiders, Far Cry, and Madden. Had these games not sold so poorly, Wii U would’ve at least continued to see installments of those. Switch only really gets third party support through Bethesda, Japanese titles, and a couple sports franchise. It’s basically missing everything else.

PS4 is doing better than you think. 3DS launches 2 1/2 years before PS4, and PS4 still outsold 3DS before hitting its 4 year anniversary.

microgenius2139d ago (Edited 2139d ago )

A console without exclusive tied with a mini console without 3rd party and still beaten by THE KING
Losers are trying their best to gain a little momentum
just make games instead of this ridiculous gimmicky features

Cheesetoenails2138d ago

which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Show all comments (71)
190°

7 Abandoned Xbox Series We Probably Won't Get Back

Has everyone completely forgotten Blinx?

Read Full Story >>
twinfinite.net
WickedLester2518d ago

You forgot to add "thank God" at the end of the headline.

tomr29922518d ago

Indeed... Praise the Lord!

V0MIT_M0NSTER2518d ago

So glad that they won't mess with Banjo anymore.

-Foxtrot2517d ago

So you wouldn't want a proper Banjo-Threeie, Jade Empire or Kameo 2...really?

AZRoboto2517d ago

Or Crimson Skies. That was the shiz

FallenAngel19842518d ago

It's a shame we can't get another Banjo-Kazooie game

-Foxtrot2517d ago

Literally one that's called Banjo-Threeie and they start the game with Kazooie waking up in distress telling Banjo of a hardly nightmare while recapping Nuts and Bolts.

PhoenixUp2518d ago

Microsoft never could maintain a longrunning decent 3D platformers series of their own

AZRoboto2517d ago

I don't think "longrunning" is really necessary... Isn't Blinx the only one that got a sequel?

darthv722517d ago

Blinx needs to return if at least to show up Bubsy.

ninsigma2517d ago

Not sure if it was Xbox only back in the day but I'd love a current gen jet set radio!

Paytaa2517d ago

Jet Set Radio Future was only on Xbox. Fantastic game. Even better than Jet Set Radio for the Dreamcast in my opinion. Such a good soundtrack too

ninsigma2517d ago

Game was beast and deserves to come back on current gen. And hell yeah plus one for that soundtrack!

Show all comments (19)